%% Zero Context Example entries are not allowed on wiki pages. All such entries have been commented out. Add context to the entries before uncommenting them.

[[caption-width-right:350: The defendant's fate rests in their hands.]]

->''"Suppose we're wrong."''
-->-- '''Juror #8'''

''12 Angry Men'' is a 1954 teleplay by Reginald Rose (and much more famously, a 1957 film directed by Creator/SidneyLumet starring Creator/HenryFonda and a veritable AllStarCast of character actors) that concerns a supposedly straightforward murder trial. An eyewitness, forensic evidence, and the accused himself all seem to clearly point to an adolescent boy having murdered his father. In the deliberation room, most of the jurors push for a quick guilty verdict, but one juror holds out and insists that they examine the evidence thoroughly to make damn sure that the accused deserves his punishment: a mandatory death sentence.

This work is best known as the film that [[TropeCodifier popularized]] the RogueJuror trope. Though it was not the first work to use it, it was the first to receive widespread critical acclaim. It's a classic of American cinema and recommended watching--especially because most of the other works on the Rogue Juror page reference it either directly or indirectly.

In 1997, it was adapted yet again, this time as a MadeForTV movie on Creator/{{Showtime}}, starring Creator/JackLemmon and Creator/GeorgeCScott. This adaptation {{race lift}}ed several jurors, [[GenderFlip gender flipped]] the judge, and [[ClusterFBomb added more cussing]]. In 2007 a Russian version titled simply ''[[Film/{{Twelve}} 12]]'' was released.

!Tropes used include:

* AmbiguouslyBrown: The defendant in the original seems to have a slightly darker skin color than the rest of the cast, and is referred to as being part of an unnamed ethnicity that lives in a New York slum.
* AnAesop: Jury duty should never be taken lightly, and a man should never be convicted of a crime unless his guilt can be proven without a reasonable doubt.
* AssholeVictim: The murder victim was an abusive father.
* AwesomenessByAnalysis: Juror #9, who provides great insights on the eyewitnesses based on their appearances at court, and in turn gives fairly logical reasons for why their testimonies might not be truthful. Also leads to the WhamLine, below.
* BelievingTheirOwnLies:
** At the start of the deliberations, Juror #3 opens by claiming to have no personal bias towards the case. It quickly becomes apparent that this is far from the truth, and #3 himself is the last one to realize it.
** Juror #9 also suggests that this trope could explain why the old man testified that he saw the defendant fleeing the murder scene, when his ability to have done so was in doubt. He was so eager for the chance to be part of a murder investigation and trial that it overrode his good sense.
* BerserkButton: #6 twice threatens violence (once explicitly, once by implication) over people showing disrespect to others.
* BlindWithoutThem: One of the witnesses is thought to be this. This is what puts her testimony into question.
* BreakThemByTalking:
** Played straight initially when Juror #8 baits #3 into lashing out in a rage (thus proving his point about IneffectualDeathThreats).
** Inverted when Juror #10 goes on a bigoted diatribe, is ignored by everyone, and spends the rest of the film in defeated silence.
** Juror #3 breaks ''himself'' by going on a similar rant, only to find that the room has gone dead silent over the pitiable wreck he has made of himself.
* CharacterFilibuster:
** Juror #10 has a particularly nasty, racism-filled rant against "the likes of him [the accused]" that causes the other jurors to turn away from him one by one, until #4 shuts him up:
-->'''Juror #10:''' Listen to me!
-->'''Juror #4:''' I have. Now sit down and don't open your mouth again.
** Juror #3 has a smaller one, but in his case he [[HeelRealization breaks down all by himself]] afterwards.
* ChromosomeCasting: All of the jurors are male. It's right in the title. Theatrical adaptations, however, sometimes avert this.
* CoolOldGuy: Juror #9, the oldest member of the cast and the first to support #8.
* DeadpanSnarker:
** Juror #4, who is known to use this to quip back at some of the apparently less-than-logical theories.
** #7 is a less subtle version, whose hostile wisecracks contribute little to the proceedings except an added sense of tension in the room.
* DissonantSerenity: Juror #8 when Juror #3 is pretending to stab him (the other jurors are standing up, worried that #3 is ''actually'' going to stab him).
* [[invoked]] DudeNotFunny: The other jurors' reaction to #3 pretending to raise the knife to stab #8, considering the tensions between them.
* EmpathicEnvironment: The rainstorm. And to a lesser extent, the fan, which finally starts up when the votes start to swing in favor of acquittal.
* EstablishingCharacterMoment: Juror #8 is first seen pondering at the window of the jury room before being called over to begin the decision. Notably, he isn't shown speaking and chattering excitedly like most of the jurors, hinting that the majority sentiment won't go through as easily as previously thought.
* EveryoneHasStandards:
** Juror #3 may be vicious and want to see the defendant executed, but even he is unwilling to listen to #10's bigoted tirades (he gets up right before #10's tirade, and doesn't sit back down until after it's over). Even Juror #4, who has come off as a {{Jerkass}} at times and is strongly convinced at the defendant's guilt, has enough and tells #10 as such.
** Juror #10 doesn't look too impressed when #3 and #12 are playing a game rather than listening to the evidence.
* ExtremelyShortTimespan: It's not established exactly at what time deliberations started, but it's implied they started no later than noon, through a rainstorm that started late in the afternoon, and finally winding down sometime after 6 pm, of the same day. The editing makes it feel like it's happening in real time, but the outside lighting and weather reminds us that it's actually taking a bit longer.
* {{Foreshadowing}}: #3's breakdown is set up very early in the movie, when he first goes to the cooler and stares at the photo of his son.
%%* FourTemperamentEnsemble:
%%** Sanguine: Juror #12 (advertising executive)
%%** Choleric: Juror #1 (football coach), and ''especially'' Juror #10 (bigoted garage owner)
%%** Melancholic: Juror #4 (stock broker)
%%** Phlegmatic: Juror #8 (architect Mr. Davis), Juror #9 (Mr. [=McCardle=]) and Juror #11 (watch maker)
%%** Sanguine and choleric: Juror #7 (salesman)
%%** Choleric and melancholic: Juror #3 (the unmerciful)
%%** Melancholic and phlegmatic: Juror #2 (bank teller)
%%** Leukine: Juror #5 (sports fan), Juror #6 (painter)
* FreudianExcuse: Juror #3 - he spends the movie continuously trying to convict a young man where there is more and more reasonable doubt for his guilt because his relationship with his son appeared to have gone very sour. [[HeelRealization He realizes this at the end, though, and does not continue his stance.]]
* FultonStreetFolly: The film is set in a New York City courtroom, and the opening and closing scenes were shot on location at the New York State Supreme Court Building in Lower Manhattan.
* TheGhost: The witnesses mentioned are never shown.
* GreyAndGrayMorality: Though the pro-acquittal side is painted ALighterShadeOfGrey.
* GuileHero: Juror #8. His smarts kick-start the plot.
* HeatWave: One of the jurors remarks that it's supposed to be the hottest day of the year, and most of them are sweaty and agitated in the poorly-ventilated deliberation room. Things get a little better once they manage to get the wall fan running.
* HeelFaceRevolvingDoor: Juror #12 is the only one who ever changes his vote back to guilty. Juror #3 compares him to a tennis ball.
* HeelRealization:
** When, in the middle of his furious insistence that the defendant is guilty, Juror #3 [[spoiler:sees the picture of his estranged son and rips it to pieces]], you can see in his face that he has just figured out what he was really doing.
** Vaguely [[ImpliedTrope implied]] for Juror #10. When he rants at length about how "they"(the unspecified ethnic group the defendant belongs to) are by nature nothing but a bunch of liars and killers, the way all eleven of the other jurors respond with open contempt for his views causes him to go practically catatonic. He changes his vote to "not guilty" and then spends the remainder of the deliberation silently [[ThousandYardStare staring at nothing]]. Somewhat ambiguous as it's not clear if this means he was actually rethinking his views, or if he just felt defeated.
* HollywoodLaw: Juror #8 states that he went walking in the defendant's neighborhood, and found a copy of the supposedly unique switchblade knife in a local store. He presents it to the jury to prove his point. In a real jury proceding, the term for this is "juror misconduct." Jurors are not permitted to perform their own investigations, or admit their own evidence (the second knife). If it were to come out that #8 did all this, it's possible (though unlikely, given the double jeopardy prohibition) the verdict could be set aside, and #8 could be charged for his actions. There is at least an acknowledgement that #8 broke the law by buying the knife, but nobody brings up that searching for a knife is misconduct. Of course, none of the the jurors are lawyers, so it's possible that they didn't recognize the acts as such.
** Also, one wonders how he managed to get a switchblade into a courtroom.
* HypocriticalHumor: This exchange, which is even funnier when considering that Juror #11 is an immigrant to the US from Europe.
-->'''Juror #10:''' He's a common, ignorant slob. He don't even speak good English.
-->'''Juror #11:''' ''Doesn't'' even speak good English.
* IllKillYou: Said by the defendant and later Juror #3, which gets thrown back in his face because he'd earlier claimed that people don't say something like that unless they mean it.
* ImmigrantPatriotism: Juror #11 takes a moment to gush about the jury trial system, and how it could only happen in a democracy like the United States. They never say where he came from, but the implication is that the country he was from is ''not'' a democracy. He also berates #7 for refusing to take the process seriously, and makes a point to make sure he is speaking English more properly than the bigoted natural-born #10.
* IneffectualDeathThreats: One point of discussion is whether the defendant was serious when he allegedly shouted "IllKillYou" prior to the murder. Juror #3 insists that anyone who says that in anger means it, but Juror #8 later throws this back at him after provoking him into doing the same.
* {{Jerkass}}: Juror #7. He doesn't care what the decision of the jury is. He's only concerned with catching a baseball game. At least the most vicious jurors voted guilty because they believed in it. That said, when called out on this he does say that he doesn't believe the accused is guilty. Fortunately, the game is rained out during the deliberation so he can relax and pay attention for once. He sounds rather more sincere about it in the 1997 version, though.
* TheJudge: Shown issuing instructions to the jury in the opening scene. Many stage productions (and the 1997 TV version) cast a woman in the role as a way of bringing at least some token gender diversity to the play without having to change its title.
* JuryDuty: [[TropeCodifier Well, yeah.]] The characters run the whole gamut of taking the duty ''very'' seriously (Juror #8's stance on this drives the whole plot, and Juror #11 later claims the responsibility to be one of the greatest things about American democracy) to being almost entirely dismissive of it (Juror #12 is more concerned with doodling and talking about his work than he is with the deliberations, and Juror #7 is mostly upset that he's missing a baseball game; [[TheReasonYouSuckSpeech both get called out for this]]). Notably, Jurors #3 and #10 ''are'' taking it seriously, but are too hung up on their own emotional baggage to approach it objectively.
* KarmaHoudini: All the Jurors in the end give the same verdict: "not guilty". If the kid is actually guilty, he gets away with murdering his father. If he is genuinely innocent, the real killer is still at large and unsuspected. Of course, within the realm of the movie the investigation would be considered ongoing, so it's more of a matter of them not covering the part where someone actually gets caught and convicted as guilty, since that's not the focus.
* TheLancer:
** Juror #9 acts as this, to some extent, to Juror #8. #9 is the first person to side with #8, and helps him out when he's arguing with the others.
** As does #4 to #3. #4 provides logical reasoning for all of #3's passionate arguments, and is one of the last people to change his mind.
* LampshadeHanging: "You know, it's interesting he'd find a knife exactly like the one the boy bought!"
** [[UpToEleven Double lampshaded]] by #3's response asking what's so interesting about it.
* LargeHam: George C. Scott as Juror #3 in the 1997 version. He yells almost every other line.
* LockedInARoom: A deliberation room. Lampshaded by #5 and #10.
-->'''Juror #5:''' I never knew they locked the door.
-->'''Juror #10:''' Sure they lock the door. What'd you think?
-->'''Juror #5:''' I don't know. It just never occurred to me.
* ManInWhite: Juror #8 traditionally wears a white coat or shirt. He's the first one to believe the boy could be innocent.
* {{Minimalism}}: Apart from a very short prologue and epilogue, the entire play/film takes place in the jury room (and an adjacent bathroom).
* MinimalistCast: At the beginning, other people (such as the defendant and the judge) are briefly shown, but for the rest of the film, we only see the twelve jurors (and the bailiff, briefly).
* MonochromeCasting:
** Perhaps unsurprisingly for a film made in TheFifties, the jury is all-white (although one is an immigrant with a noticeable accent). RaceLift for the 1997 update, which features one Latino juror and four African Americans. In a twist, one of the latter is a MalcolmXerox version of the bigoted Juror #10.
** Though Edward James Olmos, who plays Juror #11 in the 1997 version, is indeed of Mexican descent, it is not made clear if Juror #11 ''is'' actually Latino, especially since Olmos' portrayal sticks with previous portrayals of the character as an immigrant watchmaker from an undisclosed (likely Eastern) European country.
* NamelessNarrative: No names are used for any of the jurors, and not even for the victim or defendant. The film added an epilogue not in the play that [[SubvertedTrope gives last names for two of them]] (Davis for #8, and [=McCardle=] for #9).
* NiceHat: Juror #7 dons a straw fedora throughout the 1957 film, while Juror #10 wears a kufi in the 1997 version.
* NotablyQuickDeliberation: Narrowly averted: if it wasn't for one guy, they'd have voted for conviction in about five minutes.
* OhCrap: Juror #3's face when he realizes that he's just contradicted his own argument subtly, but wonderfully, evokes this sentiment.
* RaceLift: The original featured 12 white men. The 1997 movie diversified the racial makeup of the jury. [[JustifiedTrope Justified]]: In 1954, an all-white, all-male jury would be the norm, but in 1997 such a jury would be very unusual, given that having all the jurors be of the same race could be uses as grounds for an appeal later.
* RealisticDictionIsUnrealistic: While there are plenty of impassioned speeches, the trope is less severe than most examples since the characters often stutter or pause at key points.
* RealTime: Fully in the play; broken briefly at the beginning and end of the film.
* TheReasonYouSuckSpeech: Juror #11 to Juror #7, after the latter changes his vote just to break the deadlock:
-->'''Juror #11:''' What kind of a man are you? You have sat here and voted guilty with everyone else, because there are some baseball tickets burning a hole in your pocket. Now you have changed your vote because you say you're sick of all the talking? Who tells you that you have the right to play like this with a man's life? Don't you care?
-->'''Juror #7:''' Now, wait a minute. You can't talk that like that to me.
-->'''Juror #11:''' I ''can'' talk like that to you! If you want to vote not guilty, do it because you are convinced he is not guilty, not because you've had enough. And if you think he is guilty, then vote that way. Or don't you have the guts to do what you think is right?
* ReverseGrip: An important plot point is how unlikely it is for any experienced knife fighter to use a switchblade this way.
* RogueJuror: If not the TropeMaker, definitely the TropeCodifier. In this case, however, the rogue juror isn't actually convinced of the defendant's innocence at first. He just wants to forestall an overly hasty deliberation.
* {{Sadist}}: Juror #8 deliberately calls Juror #3 one to rile him up to make a point, that people don't always mean what they say.
* SecondhandStorytelling: The murder of the victim, the police investigation, and the trial are all spoken about by the twelve jurors.
* ShutUpHannibal: Juror #10 digs his own grave when he starts shooting his mouth off about how inferior the lower classes are. By the time he's finished, when everyone has clearly stopped listening, this trope is all it takes to shut him up for the rest of the movie.
** Done almost literally by #4:
-->'''Juror #10:''' Listen to me! Listen to me!
-->'''Juror #4:''' I have. Now sit down and don't open your mouth again.
* SpeechCentricWork: The film consists of the twelve jurors debating whether or not the defendant is guilty.
* TheSpock: Juror #4 is certainly the most rational of the group, concerning himself purely with the facts. Despite being one of the last holdouts in favor of conviction, he listens to all of his opponents' arguments with an open mind. Once all of his objections have been rebutted, he changes his vote without complaint.
* TheStoic: Similar to the above, Juror #4 is also the most calm and collected of the jurors, never raising his voice or showing strong emotions of any kind. He's not completely stoic, though, as a few scenes evidence. He becomes visibly unnerved while being interrogated by Juror #8, and towards the end, expresses annoyance towards Juror #3 (for his obnoxiousness), Juror #9 (for badgering him with seemingly-inane questions instead of getting to the point), and Juror #10 (for being obviously prejudiced against the defendant, instead of arriving at that conclusion by the exercise of logic).
* TitleByNumber: '''''12''' Angry Men.''
* ThunderEqualsDownpour: One clap of thunder, cue rainstorm.
* TheUnreveal: Did the boy really kill his father? If he didn't, who did? Since the play and film only see the case from the jurors' perspective (not the police's), it is never discovered. All that is known is that there is reasonable doubt as to the boy's guilt--which, under the laws of the United States, is enough to keep him from being convicted.
* VerbalTic: Juror #10 seems to have one of these, you know what I mean? *sniff*
* VideoCredits: Necessary, since none of the characters are named.
* VillainousBreakdown:
** When Juror #10 delivers his famous rant. "Listen... listen to me...."
** And Juror #3 shortly afterward. Made somewhat more poignant by the reactions of the other jurors; where they reacted to #10's breakdown with silent anger, they watch #3's meltdown with something closer to pity, as most of them realise why he is really pushing for a guilty verdict even as he denies the true reason, not just to the other jurors but to himself.
* WhamLine: Each time a piece of evidence is found to be wanting, a Wham Line usually reveals the flaw, i.e. "No one who had used one of these knives would hold it like that." "What movie did you see that night?" etc. One especially notable one (for how thoroughly it demolishes a key piece of evidence):
-->'''Juror #8:''' The old man according to his own testimony -- "I'm gonna kill you", body hitting the floor a split second later -- would have had to hear the boy make this statement with the L roaring past his nose! It's not ''possible'' he could have heard it!
* WhamShot: Juror #8 pulls out a switchblade and sticks it into the table right next to the "unique" murder weapon, showing that they are identical.
* WorthyOpponent: Both Juror #8 and #4 debate their points without getting too personal, each seems to be just as factual as the other, and #4 certainly seems to view #8 this way.
* YouAreNumberSix: The jurors are only ever referred to by their numbers, though Jurors #8 and #9 introduce their names to each other at the end of the film adaptations.
* YouWouldntShootMe:
** Juror #3 is asked to re-enact the stabbing process on Juror #8. Given the tension between the two men, and #3's almost maniacal bloodthirstiness, there's a definite tension as to how "real" #3 will make the re-enactment. [[LampshadeHanging Lampshaded]] by the alarmed reactions of most of the other ten jurors as he draws back the knife.
** Referring back to the IllKillYou example above, Juror #8 afterwards remarks, "You don't really mean you'll kill me, do you?"